Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

Tasting notes, varietals, grapes - anything related to wine
Post Reply
Message
Author
mbeckman
Posts: 55
Joined: July 11th, 2018, 12:54 pm
Location: NY

Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#1 Post by mbeckman » August 13th, 2019, 8:26 am

Now we can argue whether or not Rhys actually was treated differently than KJ (or Foley) would have been in the same situation.

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/business/ ... executives
Michael Beckman

mbeckman
Posts: 55
Joined: July 11th, 2018, 12:54 pm
Location: NY

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#2 Post by mbeckman » August 13th, 2019, 8:30 am

Also this looks to be bigger much in scale than what Rhys did, apart from the illegal storage of water there were no rights to.
Michael Beckman

User avatar
larry schaffer
BerserkerBusiness
BerserkerBusiness
Posts: 7741
Joined: January 28th, 2009, 9:26 am
Location: Santa Ynez Valley, CA

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#3 Post by larry schaffer » August 13th, 2019, 9:11 am

Thank you for posting this. And it should be really interesting to watch. A lot more drama in this than appears on the surface, as this guy had been president of Foley and stepped away just as these charges were being filed.

Note that it took over two years for the information to come out about Rhys, and that we didn't hear anything about it until the fines were announced.

Why are we hearing about this so quickly? That is the question.
larry schaffer
tercero wines

R. Frankel
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1635
Joined: January 24th, 2014, 11:07 pm

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#4 Post by R. Frankel » August 13th, 2019, 10:03 am

Interesting, and yet this report leaves out so much.

Two data points though - this combined with the Rhys penalty/reporting (very similar language and issues) indicate something. Noise? Coincidence? Or does this reflect energetic new leadership at the water board(s) in CA. Trying to make names for themselves or more a ‘holy crap look what people have been getting away with! Let’s make some big examples and get growers to take these laws more seriously’ moment?
Rich Frankel

mbeckman
Posts: 55
Joined: July 11th, 2018, 12:54 pm
Location: NY

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#5 Post by mbeckman » August 13th, 2019, 10:21 am

R. Frankel wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 10:03 am
Interesting, and yet this report leaves out so much.

Two data points though - this combined with the Rhys penalty/reporting (very similar language and issues) indicate something. Noise? Coincidence? Or does this reflect energetic new leadership at the water board(s) in CA. Trying to make names for themselves or more a ‘holy crap look what people have been getting away with! Let’s make some big examples and get growers to take these laws more seriously’ moment?
Here is the report, there seems to be a hefty dose of deceit throughout, and the images look bad.

https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoa ... Report.pdf

Not sure about if it is a coincidence, but I had heard people talking as if the pressure was off in recent years from regulators after the fires as there was so much to deal with. Maybe the enforcement arm is catching up on everything they saw happening but couldn't pursue? Repeated satellite imagery seems to have played a big part in both Rhys and now this investigation.
Michael Beckman

User avatar
GregT
Posts: 8019
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 3:12 pm

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#6 Post by GregT » August 13th, 2019, 10:34 am

Given Mr. Reimers has had experience in developing vineyards in Sonoma County, he should be aware of required Vineyard Erosion and Sediment Control Ordinance (VESCO) permits through SCACO.
Former head of KJ and Foley, no way he can say he didn't know. Especially since his business is developing vineyards.
G . T a t a r

[i]"the incorrect overuse of apostrophes is staggering these days. I wonder if half the adults these days have any idea what they are for." Chris Seiber, 5/14/19[/i]

User avatar
Neal.Mollen
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 33982
Joined: January 30th, 2009, 1:26 pm

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#7 Post by Neal.Mollen » August 13th, 2019, 10:50 am

Interesting that the CA agency's web address is "waterboards," which I would have thought conjured a less-than-savory image
I don't have to speak; she defends me

A drunkard's dream if I ever did see one

User avatar
Dave McIsaac
BerserkerDay Champion
BerserkerDay Champion
Posts: 3643
Joined: November 29th, 2010, 1:13 pm
Location: Hudson, Ohio

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#8 Post by Dave McIsaac » August 13th, 2019, 1:00 pm

Dagnabbit Truett!! [wow.gif] [cheers.gif]

User avatar
Brian Tuite
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 19270
Joined: July 3rd, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Podunk CA

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#9 Post by Brian Tuite » August 13th, 2019, 1:53 pm

mbeckman wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 10:21 am

Here is the report, there seems to be a hefty dose of deceit throughout, and the images look bad.

https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoa ... Report.pdf
Wow, just wow!
Bob Wood - 1949-2013 Berserker for eternity! RIP

"On self-reflection, I think a big part of it was me just being a PITA customer..." ~ Anonymous Berserker

"Something so subtle only I can detect it." ~ Randy Bowman

2019 WOTY...

Wes Barton
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3626
Joined: January 29th, 2009, 3:54 am

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#10 Post by Wes Barton » August 13th, 2019, 4:28 pm

Looks like at least a few thousands times the impact of the Rhys project, so I assume the fine will be in the billions, right?
ITB - Useless lackey

"I've acquired enough wine to seduce an elephant." - Jennifer Robin

T Welch
Posts: 3120
Joined: April 12th, 2010, 9:46 pm

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#11 Post by T Welch » August 13th, 2019, 4:32 pm

Dave McIsaac wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 1:00 pm
Dagnabbit Truett!! [wow.gif] [cheers.gif]
Now what did I do?
T*R*U*E*T*T

User avatar
P@u1_M3nk3s
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1506
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 2:14 pm
Location: El Cerrito CA

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#12 Post by P@u1_M3nk3s » August 13th, 2019, 4:58 pm

I didn’t see it mentioned but the Rhys violations impacted a designated “wild and scenic river”, the undammed Eel river. Does that affect the fine amount?
Cheers,
Paul

AlexS
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 21817
Joined: February 19th, 2009, 4:05 pm
Location: Mwaukee, 'sconsin

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#13 Post by AlexS » August 13th, 2019, 5:05 pm

This thread isn't legit until Alan posts.
s t e w @ r t

User avatar
Alan Rath
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 18970
Joined: April 24th, 2009, 12:45 am
Location: Bay Area, CA. Sometimes out to lunch.

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#14 Post by Alan Rath » August 13th, 2019, 5:22 pm

If he does, I'll be impressed. And a little frightened [wow.gif]
I'm just one lost soul, swimming in a fish bowl, year after year

User avatar
Dave McIsaac
BerserkerDay Champion
BerserkerDay Champion
Posts: 3643
Joined: November 29th, 2010, 1:13 pm
Location: Hudson, Ohio

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#15 Post by Dave McIsaac » August 13th, 2019, 6:19 pm

T Welch wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 4:32 pm
Dave McIsaac wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 1:00 pm
Dagnabbit Truett!! [wow.gif] [cheers.gif]
Now what did I do?
Oh Ho Ho Ho - don't play the innocent here, M'Lad... we know you are the driving source behind this...... [snort.gif]

AlexS
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 21817
Joined: February 19th, 2009, 4:05 pm
Location: Mwaukee, 'sconsin

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#16 Post by AlexS » August 13th, 2019, 6:26 pm

Alan Rath wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 5:22 pm
If he does, I'll be impressed. And a little frightened [wow.gif]
Well, I suppose you referring to yourself in the 3rd person was only inevitable ;) neener
s t e w @ r t

User avatar
Alan Rath
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 18970
Joined: April 24th, 2009, 12:45 am
Location: Bay Area, CA. Sometimes out to lunch.

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#17 Post by Alan Rath » August 13th, 2019, 6:29 pm

AlexS wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:26 pm
Alan Rath wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 5:22 pm
If he does, I'll be impressed. And a little frightened [wow.gif]
Well, I suppose you referring to yourself in the 3rd person was only inevitable ;) neener
Ha, if I'm going to refer to myself, it will be the royal we [bow.gif]
I'm just one lost soul, swimming in a fish bowl, year after year

AlexS
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 21817
Joined: February 19th, 2009, 4:05 pm
Location: Mwaukee, 'sconsin

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#18 Post by AlexS » August 13th, 2019, 6:34 pm

And we totally understand (or not) [berserker.gif]
s t e w @ r t

User avatar
D@vid Bu3ker
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 33506
Joined: February 14th, 2009, 8:06 am
Location: Connecticut

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#19 Post by D@vid Bu3ker » August 13th, 2019, 6:47 pm

P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 4:58 pm
I didn’t see it mentioned but the Rhys violations impacted a designated “wild and scenic river”, the undammed Eel river. Does that affect the fine amount?
Impacted is a stretch, even in reading the report.
David Bueker - Rieslingfan

User avatar
Craig G
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 14768
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 10:57 am
Location: Town of Cats

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#20 Post by Craig G » August 13th, 2019, 7:06 pm

Alan Rath wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:29 pm
AlexS wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:26 pm
Alan Rath wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 5:22 pm
If he does, I'll be impressed. And a little frightened [wow.gif]
Well, I suppose you referring to yourself in the 3rd person was only inevitable ;) neener
Ha, if I'm going to refer to myself, it will be the royal we [bow.gif]
Thank you for not explaining the joke, which by the way was a good one.
“You need to look down to the bottom shelf where they keep the Fighting Cock” — Corey N.

C. Gle@son

User avatar
Craig G
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 14768
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 10:57 am
Location: Town of Cats

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#21 Post by Craig G » August 13th, 2019, 7:07 pm

Neal.Mollen wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 10:50 am
Interesting that the CA agency's web address is "waterboards," which I would have thought conjured a less-than-savory image
“We meant to do that.”
“You need to look down to the bottom shelf where they keep the Fighting Cock” — Corey N.

C. Gle@son

User avatar
Randy Bowman
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 9773
Joined: January 27th, 2009, 2:23 pm
Location: Napa, CA

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#22 Post by Randy Bowman » August 13th, 2019, 7:28 pm

Over the years, certain violations that weren't so easily visible were common. Easier to beg forgiveness than to get permission. A person could spend years and thousands of dollars to remove a tree only to have a neighbor or the Sierra Club take it to the supreme court. When you are caught, it's obvious you can't return the property and trees to their original state. So a hefty fine is in order and that fine is probably cheaper than obtaining permission and fighting environmentalists.

This report is pretty comprehensive. Should be a real big fine, plus heavy expenses to obtain permits. The vineyard is now a viable way to protect the disturbed land. I doubt they will be required to replant trees, clear channels etc., and be denied permission to plant grape vines.
IN THE BUSINESS SHILL: An associate of a person selling goods, who pretends no association to the seller and assumes the air of an enthusiastic customer.

User avatar
P@u1_M3nk3s
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1506
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 2:14 pm
Location: El Cerrito CA

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#23 Post by P@u1_M3nk3s » August 13th, 2019, 8:22 pm

D@vid Bu3ker wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:47 pm
P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 4:58 pm
I didn’t see it mentioned but the Rhys violations impacted a designated “wild and scenic river”, the undammed Eel river. Does that affect the fine amount?
Impacted is a stretch, even in reading the report.
Whatever your preferred phrasing, the Eel is a designated wild and scenic river. The report states these violations occurred partially within the Eel’s watershed. The topic of this thread deals with violations on a river that is not designated wild and scenic. Does the finding of violations on a designated wild and scenic watershed increase the severity?
Cheers,
Paul

Wes Barton
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 3626
Joined: January 29th, 2009, 3:54 am

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#24 Post by Wes Barton » August 13th, 2019, 9:24 pm

P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 8:22 pm
D@vid Bu3ker wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:47 pm
P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 4:58 pm
I didn’t see it mentioned but the Rhys violations impacted a designated “wild and scenic river”, the undammed Eel river. Does that affect the fine amount?
Impacted is a stretch, even in reading the report.
Whatever your preferred phrasing, the Eel is a designated wild and scenic river. The report states these violations occurred partially within the Eel’s watershed. The topic of this thread deals with violations on a river that is not designated wild and scenic. Does the finding of violations on a designated wild and scenic watershed increase the severity?
True. But, also, with Rhys violation showed the reckless shortcutting with the road construction had the potential to put the watershed at great risk, had there been a major storm event. It also showed actual erosion being immediately captured. My reading is the size of that fine relates to how unacceptable putting that watershed at risk is. Seems appropriate.

This case is quite different. Much greater area. Massive erosion. Reckless damage. Massive actual damage to the watershed. The spirit of doing that scale of a project without permitting is in a different league. The repeated lying to regulators is intolerable. In a fair world this guy will do prison time and have his personal wealth stripped by the fines.
ITB - Useless lackey

"I've acquired enough wine to seduce an elephant." - Jennifer Robin

User avatar
P@u1_M3nk3s
GCC Member
GCC Member
Posts: 1506
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 2:14 pm
Location: El Cerrito CA

Re: Water quality agency claims vintner’s business improperly cleared Cloverdale land

#25 Post by P@u1_M3nk3s » August 13th, 2019, 9:57 pm

Wes Barton wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 9:24 pm
P@u1_M3nk3s wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 8:22 pm
D@vid Bu3ker wrote:
August 13th, 2019, 6:47 pm


Impacted is a stretch, even in reading the report.
Whatever your preferred phrasing, the Eel is a designated wild and scenic river. The report states these violations occurred partially within the Eel’s watershed. The topic of this thread deals with violations on a river that is not designated wild and scenic. Does the finding of violations on a designated wild and scenic watershed increase the severity?
True. But, also, with Rhys violation showed the reckless shortcutting with the road construction had the potential to put the watershed at great risk, had there been a major storm event. It also showed actual erosion being immediately captured. My reading is the size of that fine relates to how unacceptable putting that watershed at risk is. Seems appropriate.

This case is quite different. Much greater area. Massive erosion. Reckless damage. Massive actual damage to the watershed. The spirit of doing that scale of a project without permitting is in a different league. The repeated lying to regulators is intolerable. In a fair world this guy will do prison time and have his personal wealth stripped by the fines.
It will be interesting, to say the least, what penalties the water board will assess.
Cheers,
Paul

Post Reply

Return to “Wine Talk”